Former boxer and convicted rapist Mike Tyson has entered the sexism debate engulfing Australian politics.
Impressed by Prime Minister Julia Gillard's fiery speech to parliament in which she branded Opposition Leader Tony Abbott sexist, Tyson says society is sexist.
"I'm not saying she's (Julia Gillard) right. I'm not saying that I'm on her side, I'm just going by the facts of what history proves, that most males are that way," Tyson told The Sunday Telegraph.
"We can't help that, society told us to be that way. We have to within ourselves overcome that thinking, change that thinking, and then everybody might be on equal terms."

Mr Abbott is a product of a sexist society, Tyson says.
"I can't judge nobody, I have my own history with people and crime and women and everything, so I'm not going to judge him. We have a process of learning.
"That's what we are as people and as time goes on, maybe we'll learn and think differently.
"I'm not saying he's a bad guy ... I'm just saying sometimes we get caught up with our society."
Tyson, 46, thinks it's "wonderful" Australia has a female prime minister.
The former champion boxer, who was convicted of rape in the US in 1992, will visit Australia in November for a five-day speaking tour.

He says he's a "changed man" and will be on his "best behaviour" when he arrives in the country.
"You know, you're not going to see me in the strip clubs in Australia, you're not going to see me out in the clubs in Australia. I'm not going to be getting high in Australia.
"I'm just going to be going there and enjoying myself, and then hope the people enjoy themselves as well."

On Sunday morning television, Australian Greens leader Christine Milne said Tyson was entitled to his view and that it didn't have anything to do with the prime minister.
"She can't help who supports her or doesn't and says so publicly," Senator Milne told Sky News.

Sunday, October 28, 2012

THE SELF-RIGHTEOUS BBC HIERARCHY SHOULD ALL BE JAILED FOR COMPLICITY IN SAVILE'S CREEPY CRIMESStoke Mandeville Hospital has said it is "shocked" over abuse allegations made against Sir Jimmy Savile while he was at the hospital and said it was unaware of any reports of inappropriate behaviour.

Nurses at the hospital, in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, told children to stay in bed and pretend they were asleep to prevent the TV presenter from groping them, it has been claimed. They were also said to have dreaded Savile's visits because of his behaviour.

The statement from Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust read: "We are shocked to hear of the serious allegations about Jimmy Savile. "We are unaware of any record or reports of inappropriate behaviour of this nature during Jimmy's work with the trust." Rebecca Owen, a former patient at the hospital, told the Daily Telegraph: "It was an air of resignation that you had to put up with.

"There was some sort of ironic chatter between the nurses about who would be the lucky one to go off to his room. Eight criminal allegations have been made to police against Jimmy Savile "And then, as one of the nurses was leaving or passing by my bed, she leant over and said, 'the best you can do is stay in bed until he's gone and pretend to be asleep'."

It comes after two fresh allegations were made about abuse at Leeds General Infirmary relating to incidents in the 1970s. The hospital said two people, thought to be patients, came forward to report abuse. It said it was unclear whether the alleged abuse took place when Savile was a volunteer porter at the hospital, or when he was visiting informally.

In a separate incident, former nurse June Thornton said she saw Savile abuse a brain-damaged young girl at Leeds General Infirmary. Ms Thornton was a patient at the time of the alleged incident and was recovering from an operation. She said: "She had brain damage, and Jimmy Savile came in and kissed her. "He started kissing her neck, running his hands up and down her arms, and then started to molest her. "Because I was laid flat on my back, there was nothing I could do."

A spokesman for Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust said: "We are shocked at the nature and extent of the very serious allegations made against Jimmy Savile which were revealed by the Metropolitan Police on Wednesday. "At this stage we are not aware to what degree their investigation relates to incidents in Leeds." Savile's headstone was removed from a cemetery in Scarborough on Tuesday out of "respect to public opinion". The Jim'll Fix It star died last year at the age of 84.

The elaborate tombstone was removed from Woodlands Cemetery at the request of Savile's family, to be broken up and sent to landfill. Police said they believe the "predatory sex offender" could have abused up to 25 victims over a period of 40 years. Commander Peter Spindler, Scotland Yard's head of specialist crime investigations, said the abuse appeared to have been on a "national scale".

He told the BBC: "At this stage it is quite clear from what women are telling us that Savile was a predatory sex offender." The Metropolitan Police have so far recorded two criminal allegations of rape and six allegations of indecent assault against the former Top of the Pops presenter.

Friday, October 26, 2012

Dr. Michael Pelling put enormous effort into reforming the family courts. In the High Court a judge said; "Dr. Pelling's work in the family courts has been extremely helpful." I was there. Recently Pelling told me he had given up. He also said the Men's Movements were pathetic. Each of the Men's Movements expels their best worker, including me. Eugen Hockenjos worked for seven years to win a case in the highest court. In response, the government changed the law so that the next man would have to start all over again. Recently Eugen told me he had failed.

I worry about a man who works too many decades on this matter, for instance Robert Whiston. For one thing, their women hate it. I think that psychologically it is very damaging.New men come into the Men's Movements and are contemptuous of the failure of previous activists to achieve anything. Matt O'Connor was going to get results in two years, he told me. He had contempt to those who went before him. He is not the only one. If you talk to a new recruit, he immediately knows that your analysis is wrong. Also, he refuses to read the relevant books, for instance Melanie Phillips, Erin Pizzey, Patricia Morgan, Ivor Catt or the radfems like Catharine MacKinnon. Thus all the campaigning for fathers' rights is based on ignorance.The "Retreat" strategy has been successful on all four occasions, and no more fathers are willing to use it. http://www.ivorcatt.com/2908.htm. Matt told me he used it successfully, and then did not tell his members about it.I established that under all law, national and international, a child has no right of access to its father. Divorced/divorcing fathers are indifferent to this information. They are not interested in campaigning for legislation on the matter.We have to sit and watch further generations of children being badly damaged by the family courts. Fathers are unwilling to defy the court's rules of secrecy, as I demanded twenty years ago.

Officially sanctioned injustice focuses the victim’s mind wonderfully. When such an injustice befalls someone of high intelligence, iron will and an enormous reservoir of patience, sometimes one person can change a system.

Meet Toronto tax consultant Lucien Khodeir. Khodeir got screwed over years ago through Canada’s recipient-biased 1997 Child Support Guidelines. He tasked himself to analyze them exhaustively, prove their bias and force judicial reform.

Khodeir is not the first person to denounce the inherent unfairness in the guidelines, but he may be the most pertinacious. He’s written two e-books on the subject, and argued the need for reform through the courts up to the UN level on his own dime. According to almost equally knowledgeable comrades-in-arms, Khodeir has established a new gold standard in legal advocacy for the fathers’ rights movement. We owe him a hearing.

Recently Khodeir sent a 55-page letter to federal and provincial justice ministers, other politicians and media, calling for corrections to the guidelines’ well-known deficiencies, patterned on international reforms undertaken in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. In the United States, he notes, every state’s child-support guidelines are publicly reviewed every four years.

The crux of Canada’s 1997 guidelines’ problem is that they substantially increased support obligations, while payors — usually dads — could no longer deduct their contribution from taxes. All the provinces signed on (except Quebec, where the system is fairer, more reality-based).

The guidelines were premised on a methodologically flawed 1985 study, concluding divorce impoverished women and enriched men. That is not the case. The study ignored the realities of a divorced father’s new logistical burdens and obligations to a second family. Within three years of separation, a third of dads and a quarter of moms have new partners, half including other children. By nine years after separation, 40% of both dads and mums have second families.

Before 1997, judges reviewed individual cases on their merits. After, judges shifted their focus from particular circumstances to the abstract ideal of ending the “feminization of poverty”: i.e., maintaining children’s theoretically desirable lifestyle through support payments that often have no relevance to the individual father’s literal resources. Thus, the famous “deadbeat dad” of popular imagination is largely a myth. Most dads want to comply, but many can’t. In fact, only 10% of fathers are willful defaulters, a lower percentage than support-responsible “deadbeat moms.”

The guidelines’ social-engineering mandate has led to both farce and tragedy.

In 2000, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld as reasonable and fair a Toronto father’s order to pay 96% of his take-home pay in spousal and child support, leaving him $302 a month to live on.

Then there was Darren White of Prince George, B.C., whose dual support orders equalled 114% of his gross income, because the judge chose to believe that White was not paying $439 monthly for a child in another province. White’s ex-wife held the exact same job at the same salary, so should not have needed spousal support. Nevertheless, the judge ordered White out of the family home, adding the cost of new lodgings, and refusing further “visitation” with his children.

Speaking on behalf of the court, another judge said the case was in no way special. Perhaps not to the judge, but special enough to Darrin White that he walked into the woods and hanged himself.

Variations on these injustices fill the family court literature. Stats Canada does not keep separate tabs on custody-linked suicides. But Australia, a country much like our own in this regard, does — and there are about 20 hardship-related suicides a week. An American academic in the field estimates there are about 1,000 divorce-related male suicides a year in the United States. (Women’s suicide rates stay constant through divorce.)

Khodeir notes: “Since May 1997, Canada’s child-support guidelines have been responsible for causing damage to 340,000 divorced parents at the alarming rate of $100-million every month. These damages will reach the $20-billion mark by the end of 2013 and undoubtedly classify Canada’s child-support guidelines as the longest-running, most expensive scandal in the history of Canadian politics.”

The state was counting on fathers to end single-mother poverty, but it hasn’t. A study of Low Income Cut-off (LICO) rates for children of single-parent families seven years after the guidelines were initiated showed no change from the seven years before the guidelines. They are unlikely to have improved since then. It’s time to take a fresh look at the failed guidelines with a view to reality — and gender-neutral justice.

Criticising women not sexism or misogyny

"I WILL not be lectured about sexism and misandry by this woman", he yelled in the chamber.

"What the?" came the muffled reply of all the other members, as they pondered what the hell misandry even means. (Hatred of men, everyone.)

We have really descended to new depths when Julia Gillard cites Tony Abbott’s reference to housewives doing the ironing as evidence of his deep-rooted misogynistic views.

I don’t do the ironing, but this is mainly because I have discovered the joy of new fabrics, most particularly microfibre.

I do, however, mow the lawns, mainly because the lawn-mowing equivalent of the Kreepy Krauly has not yet been discovered.

I have had a long professional career as an economist, working in universities, for the government, as a company director and now as a newspaper commentator.

Have I encountered sexism and misogyny along the way? Not that I have noticed, although I am the type who would be inclined to suck it up and fight back.

I often have criticisms levelled at me. Only yesterday, someone (anonymous, of course) described me as a “commentator’s bootlace”. I take these remarks as indicative of the person’s opinion of my work not good.

That’s fine.

But here’s the real rub: I do not regard what is said or written about me as sexist or misogynistic, even if the comments are expressed in personally abusive terms, which they sometimes are.

My view is that if you put yourself out there, it is only reasonable to expect attacks and criticisms. So be it.

Have I benefited from being in a profession which has traditionally been dominated by men? You bet, although I find comfort in the knowledge that merit and competence are always part of the selection criteria. But could this be called reverse sexism?

The really troubling implication of the showdown in parliament this week is that the Prime Minister will now misrepresent any criticisms of her performance and the performance of her government as examples of sexism and misogyny. She will play this card, even if it is the lowest trick in the book, constantly portraying herself as a helpless victim.

Monday, October 8, 2012

Sad reading folks. We can thank Aunty HELLen for pushing the feminist mandate! No wonder the "system" is a total let down for children and the gender bias ideologies make it hell for fathers. This makes all the bent dyke's go happy- crappy in the fuzzy new age stinking thinking utopian bubble they live in. Do we kiwi's know gender balance is good for kids? Time for equal rights for both genders Ms Klark you deranged wench.Stop the blame game bitch!

"It is those biases which have been built into our system right the way through it, largely from feminist rhetoric that implies that males are always to blame."

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

My blog will cease until I get natural justice. big bruv needs some mental health help.
Time to get real with the enemy.
Watch this space. Oh yes, this fool thinks it can continue its cowardly attack without consequences.
Poor deluded fool is in for a nasty surprise.

From kiwiblog the enemy ( big blouse bruv ) is this;October 3rd, 2012 at 8:15 pm
If I were DPF I would not have been so quick to rescind the ban. D4J is a well practiced liar, it would not surprise me at all if the original post on Cam’s blog did indeed come from him.
[DPF: No, his IP address has always been with the same ISP]

Still big bruv spills his Internet vile. This dude is seriously unhinged or is it a satanic troll monster of cowardly proportions?

His latest from kiwiblog. It makes a good case study on how low down and deranged the anti - God establishment are

big bruv (10,730) Says: October 4th, 2012 at 6:37 am
Oh this is great!
The religious fundies Andrei, Keeping Stock and Kowtow side with the Misogynist Bigot D4J simply because he believes in the sky fairy.
I guess this just shows once again how evil religion is.